Effect of the implant‐supported provisional restoration on the accuracy of digital peri‐implant mucosa replication–A clinical study

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the effect of implant-supported provisional restorations (ISPRs) on the accuracy of the intraoral scanned peri-implant soft-tissue profile in the esthetic area. Materials and Methods:Sixteen patients with a single ISPR in the maxillary central incisor's region were recruited for this study. Three impression methods were sequentially used in each patient: (1) an intraoral scanning (IOS) with the ISPR, (2) a conventional impression using the ISPR as impression coping, and (3) a routine IOS without the ISPR. The stereolithography files of the three impression methods obtained from the same patient were superimposed, and the conventional impression method was used as the reference model. Two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) analyses were performed to measure the peri-implant soft-tissue deviation between the reference models and IOS from the groups with or without the ISPR, respectively. Data were presented as the means ± standard deviations. Two-way analyses of variance with post hoc Sidak's multiple comparisons and paired t-tests were performed for 2D and 3D analyses, respectively. The significance level was set at p < .05. Results:The peri-implant mucosa without the ISPR immediately collapsed (<20 s), particularly on the palatine side of the labial mucosa and labial side of the palatine mucosa. Consequently, the IOS without the ISPR led to 414.7 ± 116.0 μm of overall dimensional deformation in the cuff-like submucosal region, which was significantly larger (p < .0001) than that in the IOS with the ISPR (230.6 ± 85.5 μm). Conclusion:Implant-supported provisional restorations are important for accurate replication of the intraorally scanned peri-implant soft-tissue profile.

Performance of indirect technique in peri‐implant soft tissue contour duplication in the anterior maxilla: A clinical pilot study

“…23 In peri-implant soft tissue, the indirect IOS impression showed a linear deviation of approximately 40 μm, verifying the accuracy of the indirect technique. 13 However, Xiong et al only focused on the effect of scanning the provisional crown by the indirect technique in the impression procedure and concluded that the interim restoration is essential for a precise replication. 13 The effect of the indirect technique on the definite crown has not been studied to reveal the potential advantages of this approach regarding the final outcomes.…”

“…13 However, Xiong et al only focused on the effect of scanning the provisional crown by the indirect technique in the impression procedure and concluded that the interim restoration is essential for a precise replication. 13 The effect of the indirect technique on the definite crown has not been studied to reveal the potential advantages of this approach regarding the final outcomes. Therefore, we compared peri-implant soft tissue profile after the delivery of definite crown fabricated by two impression techniques.…”

“…10,12 Xiong et al carried out the first clinical research to investigate the accuracy of the indirect technique and noted that the emergence profile of the provisional crown captured this way is important for accurate replication. 13 Therefore, the indirect technique was recommended in clinic to avoid the risk of gingival shrinkage. 14 Monaco suggested that the indication for the direct technique is stable peri-implant soft tissues, while the indirect technique is recommended if the soft tissue collapses speedily.…”

“…By comparing the peri‐implant soft tissue profiles reproduced by conventional impression and direct intraoral scanning, Silva Marques and Duran both concluded that direct scanning does not accurately capture the soft tissue profile 10,12 . Xiong et al carried out the first clinical research to investigate the accuracy of the indirect technique and noted that the emergence profile of the provisional crown captured this way is important for accurate replication 13 . Therefore, the indirect technique was recommended in clinic to avoid the risk of gingival shrinkage 14 .…”

“…The impression procedure is followed by the fabrication and delivery of the definite crown. However, most studies at this stage have focused on the differences in the impression procedure 10,12,13,15 . After the delivery of the definite crown, whether the indirect technique yields differences in peri‐implant soft tissue profile and affects esthetic outcomes remains unexplored.…”